Malawi vs Serbia: Taxes on goods and services (current LCU), gaps filled
Malawi
1.22 trillion current LCU
in 2024
Serbia
1.19 trillion current LCU
in 2022
Malawi rank
35th
Serbia rank
37th
Taxes on goods and services (current LCU), gaps filled over time
- Malawi
- Serbia
How they compare
Malawi currently reports 1.22 trillion current LCU against 1.19 trillion current LCU in Serbia, a difference of 30.82 billion current LCU.
Across all 14 years both countries report, Serbia has been ahead every year.
Malawi ranks 35th and Serbia ranks 37th of 157 countries.
Serbia has averaged higher in every one of the 3 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Malawi | Serbia | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 61.14 billion current LCU | 461.61 billion current LCU | 400.47 billion current LCU | Serbia |
| 2010s | 218.63 billion current LCU | 691.08 billion current LCU | 472.44 billion current LCU | Serbia |
| 2020s | 562.23 billion current LCU | 1.01 trillion current LCU | 443.41 billion current LCU | Serbia |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher taxes on goods and services (current lcu), gaps filled, Malawi or Serbia?
- Malawi, at 1.22 trillion current LCU against 1.19 trillion current LCU in Serbia as of 2024.
- What is the difference in taxes on goods and services (current lcu), gaps filled between Malawi and Serbia?
- 30.82 billion current LCU, with Malawi ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Malawi and Serbia?
- 14 years are reported by both, from 2009 to 2022.
- How do Malawi and Serbia rank globally for taxes on goods and services (current lcu), gaps filled?
- Malawi ranks 35th and Serbia ranks 37th of 157 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Statizoid (derived), published as Taxes on goods and services (current LCU), gaps filled. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
Taxes on goods and services (current LCU) with 50 missing years estimated by linear interpolation between the nearest real observations. Only gaps of 4 years or fewer are filled, and never beyond the first or last actual measurement — these are filled holes, not forecasts.